Geodesy- and Geology-Based Slip-Rate Models for the Western United States (Excluding California) National Seismic Hazard Maps

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Geodesy- and Geology-Based Slip-Rate Models for the Western United States (Excluding California) National Seismic Hazard Maps Geodesy- and Geology-Based Slip-Rate Models for the Western United States (Excluding California) National Seismic Hazard Maps By Mark D. Petersen, Yuehua Zeng, Kathleen M. Haller, Robert McCaffrey, William C. Hammond, Peter Bird, Morgan Moschetti, Zhengkang Shen, Jayne Bormann, and Wayne Thatcher Open-File Report 2013–1293 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Suggested citation: Petersen, M.D., Zeng, Yuehua, Haller, K.M., McCaffrey, Robert, Hammond, W.C., Bird, Peter, Moschetti, Morgan, Shen, Zhengkang, Bormann, Jayne, and Thatcher, Wayne, 2014, Geodesy- and geology-based slip-rate models for the Western United States (excluding California) national seismic hazard maps: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013–1293, 80 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20131293. ISSN 2331-1258 (online) Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner. ii Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Geologic and Geodetic Data for Slip-Rate Estimation ................................................................................................... 2 Methodology for Constructing Combined-Inversion Slip-Rate Models ....................................................................... 4 Methodology for Implementing Combined-Inversion on Fault Slip-Rate Models into Hazard Maps ........................... 8 Methodology for Constructing Combined-Inversion Off-Fault Seismicity-Rate Models .............................................14 Seismic-Hazard Results ...............................................................................................................................................15 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................................................22 References Cited ..........................................................................................................................................................22 Appendixes ...................................................................................................................................................................26 Appendix A—NSHMP Block Model of Western United States Active Tectonics .......................................................27 Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................27 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................27 Block Model WUS5 ...............................................................................................................................................27 GPS Data ..............................................................................................................................................................29 Reference Frame ...............................................................................................................................................31 Data Editing .......................................................................................................................................................31 Cascadia Elastic Strain-Rate Correction ............................................................................................................32 Geologic Slip Rates ...............................................................................................................................................34 Block-Model Results with tdefnode ......................................................................................................................34 Slip Rates Derived from Block Model ....................................................................................................................35 Internal Block Strain Rates ....................................................................................................................................35 Summary ...............................................................................................................................................................36 References Cited ...................................................................................................................................................37 Appendix B—A Block Model of Western United States Tectonic Deformation for the 2014 National Seismic Hazard Maps from GPS and Geologic Data .............................................................................................................39 Abstract .................................................................................................................................................................39 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................39 Data .......................................................................................................................................................................40 Method ..................................................................................................................................................................41 Results and Discussion .........................................................................................................................................42 References Cited ...................................................................................................................................................46 Appendix C—Estimation of Fault Slip Rates in the Conterminous Western United States with Statistical and Kinematic Finite-Element Programs ..........................................................................................................................48 Overview ...............................................................................................................................................................48 Statistical Modeling of Geologic Offset Rates with Program Slippery ....................................................................48 Joint Geologic and Geophysical Inversion for Offset Rates with Program NeoKinema .........................................51 Manual Adjustments to Some Slip Rates in California...........................................................................................55 References Cited ...................................................................................................................................................56 Appendix D—A Fault-Based Model for Crustal Deformation in the Western United States ......................................58 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................58 Method ..................................................................................................................................................................58 GPS Data ..............................................................................................................................................................59 Geologic Data........................................................................................................................................................60 Fault Model ...........................................................................................................................................................61 Model Results........................................................................................................................................................63 Conclusions ...........................................................................................................................................................66 iii References Cited ...................................................................................................................................................67 Appendix E—Consideration of the Use of Off-Fault Strain Rates from Combined Inversions of Geodetic (GPS) and Geologic Data for the National Seismic Hazard Maps .......................................................................................69 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................................69
Recommended publications
  • Washington Division of Geology and Earth Resources Open File Report
    l 122 EARTHQUAKES AND SEISMOLOGY - LEGAL ASPECTS OPEN FILE REPORT 92-2 EARTHQUAKES AND Ludwin, R. S.; Malone, S. D.; Crosson, R. EARTHQUAKES AND SEISMOLOGY - LEGAL S.; Qamar, A. I., 1991, Washington SEISMOLOGY - 1946 EVENT ASPECTS eanhquak:es, 1985. Clague, J. J., 1989, Research on eanh- Ludwin, R. S.; Qamar, A. I., 1991, Reeval­ Perkins, J. B.; Moy, Kenneth, 1989, Llabil­ quak:e-induced ground failures in south­ uation of the 19th century Washington ity of local government for earthquake western British Columbia [abstract). and Oregon eanhquake catalog using hazards and losses-A guide to the law Evans, S. G., 1989, The 1946 Mount Colo­ original accounts-The moderate sized and its impacts in the States of Califor­ nel Foster rock avalanches and auoci­ earthquake of May l, 1882 [abstract). nia, Alaska, Utah, and Washington; ated displacement wave, Vancouver Is­ Final repon. Maley, Richard, 1986, Strong motion accel­ land, British Columbia. erograph stations in Oregon and Wash­ Hasegawa, H. S.; Rogers, G. C., 1978, EARTHQUAKES AND ington (April 1986). Appendix C Quantification of the magnitude 7.3, SEISMOLOGY - NETWORKS Malone, S. D., 1991, The HAWK seismic British Columbia earthquake of June 23, AND CATALOGS data acquisition and analysis system 1946. [abstract). Berg, J. W., Jr.; Baker, C. D., 1963, Oregon Hodgson, E. A., 1946, British Columbia eanhquak:es, 1841 through 1958 [ab­ Milne, W. G., 1953, Seismological investi­ earthquake, June 23, 1946. gations in British Columbia (abstract). stract). Hodgson, J. H.; Milne, W. G., 1951, Direc­ Chan, W.W., 1988, Network and array anal­ Munro, P. S.; Halliday, R. J.; Shannon, W.
    [Show full text]
  • Structure Preliminary Geotechnical Report
    I NITIAL S TUDY/MITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION Y ORBA L INDA B OULEVARD W IDENING I MPROVEMENTS P ROJECT S EPTEMBER 2020 Y ORBA L INDA, C ALIFORNIA APPENDIX F STRUCTURE PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT P:\HNT1901.02 - Yorba Linda\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND_Yorba Linda Blvd Widening Improvements Project_9.18.20.docx «09/18/20» Y ORBA L INDA B OULEVARD W IDENING I MPROVEMENTS P ROJECT I NITIAL S TUDY/MITIGATED N EGATIVE D ECLARATION Y ORBA L INDA, C ALIFORNIA S EPTEMBER 2020 This page intentionally left blank P:\HNT1901.02 - Yorba Linda\Draft ISMND\Draft ISMND_Yorba Linda Blvd Widening Improvements Project_9.18.20.docx «09/18/20» Earth Mechanics, Inc. Geotechnical & Earthquake Engineering November 13, 2019 EMI Project No. 19-143 HNTB 200 E. Sandpointe Avenue, Suite 200 Santa Ana, California 92707 Attention: Mr. Patrick Somerville Subject: Structure Preliminary Geotechnical Report Yorba Linda Blvd Bridge over Santa Ana River (Widen), Bridge No. 55C-0509 Yorba Linda Boulevard and Savi Ranch Parkway Widening Project City of Yorba Linda, California Dear Mr. Somerville: Attached is our Structure Preliminary Geotechnical Report (SPGR) for the proposed widening of the Yorba Linda Boulevard Bridge over the Santa Ana River (Bridge No. 55C-0509) in the City of Yorba Linda, California. The bridge widening is part of the Yorba Linda Boulevard and Savi Ranch Parkway Widening Project. This report was prepared to support the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA-ED) phase of the project. The SPGR includes information required by the 2017 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Foundation Reports for Bridges document.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-44568-9 — Active Faults of the World Robert Yeats Index More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-44568-9 — Active Faults of the World Robert Yeats Index More Information Index Abancay Deflection, 201, 204–206, 223 Allmendinger, R. W., 206 Abant, Turkey, earthquake of 1957 Ms 7.0, 286 allochthonous terranes, 26 Abdrakhmatov, K. Y., 381, 383 Alpine fault, New Zealand, 482, 486, 489–490, 493 Abercrombie, R. E., 461, 464 Alps, 245, 249 Abers, G. A., 475–477 Alquist-Priolo Act, California, 75 Abidin, H. Z., 464 Altay Range, 384–387 Abiz, Iran, fault, 318 Alteriis, G., 251 Acambay graben, Mexico, 182 Altiplano Plateau, 190, 191, 200, 204, 205, 222 Acambay, Mexico, earthquake of 1912 Ms 6.7, 181 Altunel, E., 305, 322 Accra, Ghana, earthquake of 1939 M 6.4, 235 Altyn Tagh fault, 336, 355, 358, 360, 362, 364–366, accreted terrane, 3 378 Acocella, V., 234 Alvarado, P., 210, 214 active fault front, 408 Álvarez-Marrón, J. M., 219 Adamek, S., 170 Amaziahu, Dead Sea, fault, 297 Adams, J., 52, 66, 71–73, 87, 494 Ambraseys, N. N., 226, 229–231, 234, 259, 264, 275, Adria, 249, 250 277, 286, 288–290, 292, 296, 300, 301, 311, 321, Afar Triangle and triple junction, 226, 227, 231–233, 328, 334, 339, 341, 352, 353 237 Ammon, C. J., 464 Afghan (Helmand) block, 318 Amuri, New Zealand, earthquake of 1888 Mw 7–7.3, 486 Agadir, Morocco, earthquake of 1960 Ms 5.9, 243 Amurian Plate, 389, 399 Age of Enlightenment, 239 Anatolia Plate, 263, 268, 292, 293 Agua Blanca fault, Baja California, 107 Ancash, Peru, earthquake of 1946 M 6.3 to 6.9, 201 Aguilera, J., vii, 79, 138, 189 Ancón fault, Venezuela, 166 Airy, G.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.4 Geology and Soils
    BEACH BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR CITY OF ANAHEIM 5. Environmental Analysis 5.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) evaluates the potential for implementation of the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan (Proposed Project) to impact geological and soil resources in the City of Anaheim. 5.4.1 Environmental Setting Regulatory Setting California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was signed into state law in 1972. Its primary purpose is to mitigate the hazard of fault rupture by prohibiting the location of structures for human occupancy across the trace of an active fault. The act delineates “Earthquake Fault Zones” along faults that are “sufficiently active” and “well defined.” The act also requires that cities and counties withhold development permits for sites within an earthquake fault zone until geologic investigations demonstrate that the sites are not threatened by surface displacement from future faulting. Pursuant to this act, structures for human occupancy are not allowed within 50 feet of the trace of an active fault. Seismic Hazard Mapping Act The Seismic Hazard Mapping Act (SHMA) was adopted by the state in 1990 to protect the public from the effects of nonsurface fault rupture earthquake hazards, including strong ground shaking, liquefaction, seismically induced landslides, or other ground failure caused by earthquakes. The goal of the act is to minimize loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. The California Geological Survey (CGS) prepares and provides local governments with seismic hazard zone maps that identify areas susceptible to amplified shaking, liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and other ground failures.
    [Show full text]
  • This Report Is Preliminary and Has Not Bee Reviewed for Conformity with US
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Northeast-trending subcrustal fault transects western Washington by Kenneth F. Fox, Jr.* Open-File Report 83-398 This report is preliminary and has not bee reviewed for conformity with U.S Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. *U.S. Geological Survey 3^5 Middlefield Road Menlo Park, California 9^025 Page Table of Contents Tectonic setting......................................................... 1 Seisraicity............................................................... 4 Discussion............................................................... 4 References cited......................................................... 6 Figures Figure 1. Magnetic anomalies in the northeastern Pacific................ 8 Figure 2. Bathymetry at intersection of Columbia lineament and Blanco fracture zone................................................. 9 Figure 3. Plane vector representation of movement of Gorda plate........ 10 Figure 4. Reconstruction of Pacific-Juan de Fuca plate geometry 2 m.y. before present................................................ 11 Figure 5. Epicenters of historical earthquakes with intensity greater than V........................................................ 12 TECTONIC SETTING The north-trending magnetic anomalies of the Juan de Fuca plate are off­ set along two conspicuous northeast-trending lineaments (fig. 1), named the Columbia offset and the Destruction offset by Carlson (1981). The northeast­ ward projections of these lineaments intersect the continental area of western Washington, hence are of potential significance to the tectonics of the Pacific Northwest region. Pavoni (1966) suggested that these lineaments were left-lateral faults, and that the Columbia, 280 km in length, had 52 km of offset, and the Destruction, with a length of 370 km, had 75 km of offset. Based on Vine's (1968) correlation of the magnetic anomalies mapped in this area by Raff and Mason (1961), with the magnetic reversal time scale, Silver (1971b, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Geodetic Position Computations
    GEODETIC POSITION COMPUTATIONS E. J. KRAKIWSKY D. B. THOMSON February 1974 TECHNICALLECTURE NOTES REPORT NO.NO. 21739 PREFACE In order to make our extensive series of lecture notes more readily available, we have scanned the old master copies and produced electronic versions in Portable Document Format. The quality of the images varies depending on the quality of the originals. The images have not been converted to searchable text. GEODETIC POSITION COMPUTATIONS E.J. Krakiwsky D.B. Thomson Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering University of New Brunswick P.O. Box 4400 Fredericton. N .B. Canada E3B5A3 February 197 4 Latest Reprinting December 1995 PREFACE The purpose of these notes is to give the theory and use of some methods of computing the geodetic positions of points on a reference ellipsoid and on the terrain. Justification for the first three sections o{ these lecture notes, which are concerned with the classical problem of "cCDputation of geodetic positions on the surface of an ellipsoid" is not easy to come by. It can onl.y be stated that the attempt has been to produce a self contained package , cont8.i.ning the complete development of same representative methods that exist in the literature. The last section is an introduction to three dimensional computation methods , and is offered as an alternative to the classical approach. Several problems, and their respective solutions, are presented. The approach t~en herein is to perform complete derivations, thus stqing awrq f'rcm the practice of giving a list of for11111lae to use in the solution of' a problem.
    [Show full text]
  • GPS and the Search for Axions
    GPS and the Search for Axions A. Nicolaidis1 Theoretical Physics Department Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece Abstract: GPS, an excellent tool for geodesy, may serve also particle physics. In the presence of Earth’s magnetic field, a GPS photon may be transformed into an axion. The proposed experimental setup involves the transmission of a GPS signal from a satellite to another satellite, both in low orbit around the Earth. To increase the accuracy of the experiment, we evaluate the influence of Earth’s gravitational field on the whole quantum phenomenon. There is a significant advantage in our proposal. While the geomagnetic field B is low, the magnetized length L is very large, resulting into a scale (BL)2 orders of magnitude higher than existing or proposed reaches. The transformation of the GPS photons into axion particles will result in a dimming of the photons and even to a “light shining through the Earth” phenomenon. 1 Email: [email protected] 1 Introduction Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) describes the strong interactions among quarks and gluons and offers definite predictions at the high energy-perturbative domain. At low energies the non-linear nature of the theory introduces a non-trivial vacuum which violates the CP symmetry. The CP violating term is parameterized by θ and experimental bounds indicate that θ ≤ 10–10. The smallness of θ is known as the strong CP problem. An elegant solution has been offered by Peccei – Quinn [1]. A global U(1)PQ symmetry is introduced, the spontaneous breaking of which provides the cancellation of the θ – term. As a byproduct, we obtain the axion field, the Nambu-Goldstone boson of the broken U(1)PQ symmetry.
    [Show full text]
  • California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies
    California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies Overview of Geological Hazards This report was prepared by Mark A. Hemphill-Haley, Eileen Hemphill-Haley, and Wyeth Wunderlich of the Humboldt State University Department of Geology. It is part of the California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies collection, edited by Mark Severy, Zachary Alva, Gregory Chapman, Maia Cheli, Tanya Garcia, Christina Ortega, Nicole Salas, Amin Younes, James Zoellick, & Arne Jacobson, and published by the Schatz Energy Research Center in September 2020. The series is available online at schatzcenter.org/wind/ Schatz Energy Research Center Humboldt State University Arcata, CA 95521 | (707) 826-4345 California North Coast Offshore Wind Studies Disclaimer This study was prepared under contract with Humboldt State University Sponsored Programs Foundation with financial support from the Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment. The content reflects the views of the Humboldt State University Sponsored Programs Foundation and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Defense, Office of Economic Adjustment. This report was created under Grant Agreement Number: OPR19100 About the Schatz Energy Research Center The Schatz Energy Research Center at Humboldt State University advances clean and renewable energy. Our projects aim to reduce climate change and pollution while increasing energy access and resilience. Our work is collaborative and multidisciplinary, and we are grateful to the many partners who together make our efforts possible. Learn more about our work at schatzcenter.org Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Please cite as follows: Hemphill-Haley, M.A., Hemphill-Haley, E. and Wunderlich, W. (2020).
    [Show full text]
  • Coordinate Systems in Geodesy
    COORDINATE SYSTEMS IN GEODESY E. J. KRAKIWSKY D. E. WELLS May 1971 TECHNICALLECTURE NOTES REPORT NO.NO. 21716 COORDINATE SYSTElVIS IN GEODESY E.J. Krakiwsky D.E. \Vells Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering University of New Brunswick P.O. Box 4400 Fredericton, N .B. Canada E3B 5A3 May 1971 Latest Reprinting January 1998 PREFACE In order to make our extensive series of lecture notes more readily available, we have scanned the old master copies and produced electronic versions in Portable Document Format. The quality of the images varies depending on the quality of the originals. The images have not been converted to searchable text. TABLE OF CONTENTS page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS iv LIST OF TABLES . vi l. INTRODUCTION l 1.1 Poles~ Planes and -~es 4 1.2 Universal and Sidereal Time 6 1.3 Coordinate Systems in Geodesy . 7 2. TERRESTRIAL COORDINATE SYSTEMS 9 2.1 Terrestrial Geocentric Systems • . 9 2.1.1 Polar Motion and Irregular Rotation of the Earth • . • • . • • • • . 10 2.1.2 Average and Instantaneous Terrestrial Systems • 12 2.1. 3 Geodetic Systems • • • • • • • • • • . 1 17 2.2 Relationship between Cartesian and Curvilinear Coordinates • • • • • • • . • • 19 2.2.1 Cartesian and Curvilinear Coordinates of a Point on the Reference Ellipsoid • • • • • 19 2.2.2 The Position Vector in Terms of the Geodetic Latitude • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 22 2.2.3 Th~ Position Vector in Terms of the Geocentric and Reduced Latitudes . • • • • • • • • • • • 27 2.2.4 Relationships between Geodetic, Geocentric and Reduced Latitudes • . • • • • • • • • • • 28 2.2.5 The Position Vector of a Point Above the Reference Ellipsoid . • • . • • • • • • . .• 28 2.2.6 Transformation from Average Terrestrial Cartesian to Geodetic Coordinates • 31 2.3 Geodetic Datums 33 2.3.1 Datum Position Parameters .
    [Show full text]
  • Geodesy: Trends and Prospects
    Geodesy: Trends and Prospects Practktll and Scientific Values of Geodesy 25 clearly observable with the new long-baseline interferom­ We recommend that the United States support three long­ etry (LBI) and laser-ranging techniques. For example, the baseline-radio-interferometry stations and approximately 1960 Chilean earthquake (magnitude 8.3) has been calcu­ six laser ranging stations at fvced locations as part ofa new lated (Smith, 1977) to give a change in polar motion corre­ international service for determining UT and polar motion sponding to a 65-crn offset in the axis about which the pole on a continuing basis with suff~eient accuracy to meet cur­ moves, if the coseismic fault plane motion derived by Kana­ rent geodynamics needs. rnori and Cipar (1974) is used, and a possible additional 87 -ern offset due to the preseismic motion for which they The reasons for recommending support for these particu­ have presented evidence. lar numbers of stations are discussed in Section 4.2. It Seismologists generally believe that the "seismic mo­ should be noted that most of these stations also will fulfill ment" corresponding to the coseismic motion can be de­ other important scientific or applied objectives and that a rived accurately from observed long-period seismic-wave number of them are already available or will be soon. amplitudes. However, motions occurring over periods of minutes, days, or even several months before and after the quake are difficult to determine in other ways. Thus 3.3 OCEAN DYNAMICS changes in polar motion over a period of several months around the time of the quake can give a check on the total The geoid is considered to be the equipotential surface that fault displacement, which complements the information would enclose the ocean waters if all external forces were available from resurveys of the surface area surrounding the removed and the waters were to become still.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Geodynamics the Interdisciplinary Role of Space
    Journal of Geodynamics 49 (2010) 112–115 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Geodynamics journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jog The interdisciplinary role of space geodesy—Revisited Reiner Rummel Institute of Astronomical and Physical Geodesy (IAPG), Technische Universität München, Arcisstr. 21, 80290 München, Germany article info abstract Article history: In 1988 the interdisciplinary role of space geodesy has been discussed by a prominent group of leaders in Received 26 January 2009 the fields of geodesy and geophysics at an international workshop in Erice (Mueller and Zerbini, 1989). Received in revised form 4 August 2009 The workshop may be viewed as the starting point of a new era of geodesy as a discipline of Earth Accepted 6 October 2009 sciences. Since then enormous progress has been made in geodesy in terms of satellite and sensor systems, observation techniques, data processing, modelling and interpretation. The establishment of a Global Geodetic Observing System (GGOS) which is currently underway is a milestone in this respect. Wegener Keywords: served as an important role model for the definition of GGOS. In turn, Wegener will benefit from becoming Geodesy Satellite geodesy a regional entity of GGOS. −9 Global observing system What are the great challenges of the realisation of a 10 global integrated observing system? Geodesy Global Geodetic Observing System is potentially able to provide – in the narrow sense of the words – “metric and weight” to global studies of geo-processes. It certainly can meet this expectation if a number of fundamental challenges, related to issues such as the international embedding of GGOS, the realisation of further satellite missions and some open scientific questions can be solved.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Geodesy Told Through Maps
    The History of Geodesy Told through Maps Prof. Dr. Rahmi Nurhan Çelik & Prof. Dr. Erol KÖKTÜRK 16 th May 2015 Sofia Missionaries in 5000 years With all due respect... 3rd FIG Young Surveyors European Meeting 1 SUMMARIZED CHRONOLOGY 3000 BC : While settling, people were needed who understand geometries for building villages and dividing lands into parts. It is known that Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian were realized such surveying techniques. 1700 BC : After floating of Nile river, land surveying were realized to set back to lost fields’ boundaries. (32 cm wide and 5.36 m long first text book “Papyrus Rhind” explain the geometric shapes like circle, triangle, trapezoids, etc. 550+ BC : Thereafter Greeks took important role in surveying. Names in that period are well known by almost everybody in the world. Pythagoras (570–495 BC), Plato (428– 348 BC), Aristotle (384-322 BC), Eratosthenes (275–194 BC), Ptolemy (83–161 BC) 500 BC : Pythagoras thought and proposed that earth is not like a disk, it is round as a sphere 450 BC : Herodotus (484-425 BC), make a World map 350 BC : Aristotle prove Pythagoras’s thesis. 230 BC : Eratosthenes, made a survey in Egypt using sun’s angle of elevation in Alexandria and Syene (now Aswan) in order to calculate Earth circumferences. As a result of that survey he calculated the Earth circumferences about 46.000 km Moreover he also make the map of known World, c. 194 BC. 3rd FIG Young Surveyors European Meeting 2 150 : Ptolemy (AD 90-168) argued that the earth was the center of the universe.
    [Show full text]